Reviews

This was wrote by Luc Besson!

15 July 2016 - 1 out of 4 users found this review helpful.

I saw the third one jaundiced, but this one is deeply bad. It's normal that Marion Cotillard didn't return, actually that decision give her the Oscar for choosing "LA VIE EN ROSE". The plot it's so simple has a child movie, with constant "hommages" to "SCARFACE". It seems that Luc Besson wrote only for the money and with no interest at all, and I can believe that we talk about the same guy he wrote "LEÓN", "NIKITA" and "THE FIFTH ELEMENT".

The history tries to be supported with it's characters' jokes and with the action. But in this one, the characters here are abnormal and the action in addition it's forced sometimes is almost non- existent.

The only normal character is Daniel (Samy Naceri), you look at his face and it seems that the actor wants to return home with his family in every scene. The other characters have already became retarded. Émilien (Frédéric Diefenthal) is dumb and unable to do nothing without Daniel's corrections, and sometimes he acts like a damn baby who doesn't even know that 1+1 is 2. For example, the scene were he's incapable to recognize his wife Petra, only because she's wearing a brown peruke (and nothing else)... That burned by brain down. One thing is Clark Kent's glasses, but this is STUPID.

And the rest of the characters are not better... If the earlier films Gibert, was dumb, in this one... Even Émilien and Daniel's children's doesn't in the movie. The children's are only there for one sequence, when they help one of the Belgian's thugs, who's is a "professional" who cannot use a computer.

The villain, is flat and unfunny to me, I don't know if he's great or not in his country, but he doesn't make me laugh. The actor seems he's always trying to stand out, but the bad script stops him.

Even the TAXI has presence in the film. Only in the first sequence and that all, and it's actually the one who's in the TITLE.

The movie is garbage, I have seen Z movies with better scripts and smart characters. Don't waste your time watching it.

Disappointing

18 April 2016 - 0 out of 1 users found this review helpful.

He spend years looking for this film, look on the premise: Christopher Reeve + Time Travel. But once I found it and saw it ... everything changed. I felt ripped off (although I found it cheap on 2nd hand DVD) and completely disappointed. I know this review will have many "dislikes" but I do not care, that's what I felt when I saw it. It is THE WORST TIME TRAVIEL MOVIE I'VE EVER SEEN. Look, I've seen all kinds of methods to travel back in time: Cars, telephone booths, XIXs machines, doors, necklaces, family heritage, etc. But when I saw that in this film: You can travel in time with SUGGESTION... No I couldn't believe it. No, I'm not kidding. And all this comes from the mind of novelist Richard Matheson (creator of "I Am Legend" and "The Incredible Shrinking Man" among many others).

It turns out that our lead (Christopher Reeve) advised by his former philosophy teacher, tells him that only repeating to himself again and again, that we're on "X" date, you're gonna go to that date. We suggestion our mind and is eventually it send you back in time. Besides being clearly impossible... It's ridiculous! It's like saying that if we rub our hands we can get that our body begins to fly. Or if we hit very strong two bronze horns'll open an inter-dimensional gate... Ridiculous and impossible to develop a strong plot. This is what happens to this movie.

Above all, it is a romantic drama, no one intended to make it a science-fiction movie. The script is an overdose of teenage love. He reminded me that even the "Twilight" saga, boy and girl who fall in love and no one thinks carefully about the consequences of their relationship, because they are too immature and stupid to think about it. Reeve falls in love with a 1912 photography of an actress. A photo!. Although everything begins with the scene of the old woman giving him the watch and her line "Come back to me" just start the movie. It is not until it gets to investigate (obsessively) that photo, that you just discover that the girl in the picture and the old woman are the same person (without seeing the trailer and I knew I could happened). So he decides to do everything possible to travel back in time from 1980 to 1912, from the same hotel where she was 68 years ago. Suprisely, he discovers that he really traveled back in time, when he finds (in less than 2 minutes) the 1912 guest-book to find that his name was inscribed on it. So, the fact is that after hours repeating the message... Reeve's MADE IT (Duh) and he travels back to 1912 to meet and hang out with her (Elise). And just in a day, he will conquering her and make her fall in love with him. A stranger who behaves like a slimy stalker. It seems to me that it will never works in the real world, but i worked here...

My conclusion: An immature script, not only by a central shaft that sinks from since the beginning, but also the characters and the purely adolescent brat plot. Best thing in the film: Christopher Reeve and the score. The rest sucks.

Ah the 4 is because the performance of the actors but would be a 2. Which by the way, in the making of the film, even the director himself said that he didn't know how it would sell the story to any producer knowing how the main character travels in time...